Return to Transcripts main page

The Lead with Jake Tapper

Former President Clinton Testifies In House Epstein Probe; Bannon Begins To See Building MAGA Backlash To Epstein Ties; Some Slavery-Related Displays Returned To Philadelphia Landmark; Trump Says No Final Decision On Possible U.S. Strikes On Iran; Shortage Of Mechanics Looming Over Airline Industry. Aired 6-7p ET

Aired February 27, 2026 - 18:00   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

JAKE TAPPER, CNN HOST: Welcome to the second hour of The Lead.

[18:00:00]

I'm Jake Tapper in Philadelphia.

We are following breaking news tonight. Moments ago, the House Oversight Committee wrapped up its deposition of former President Bill Clinton as part of its Jeffrey Epstein investigation. President Clinton, who flew on Epstein's plane at least 16 times, according to a CNN analysis, says he saw nothing wrong and did nothing wrong.

Today, he's facing questions about some of the photographs and documents in the Epstein files that were recently released by the Department of Justice as required by law. The head of the House Oversight Committee saying that the investigation is far from over, they have many more people to question.

CNN's Annie Grayer is in Chappaqua, New York, for us, where that's of course where the depositions have taken place yesterday and today.

Annie, tell us what you've learned so far about the types of questions and answers so far in the Bill Clinton deposition.

ANNIE GRAYER, CNN SENIOR REPORTER: Well, Jake, we've learned that this deposition has wrapped after approximately six hours of the former president sitting behind closed doors in the building behind me, getting questions from both Democrat and Republican lawmakers who had a bipartisan interest in learning more about the former president's relationship with Jeffrey Epstein, that is well-documented.

And we are learning from sources some of the types of questions that were discussed, information that was discussed in this deposition. For example, we're told the former president was shown the photo of himself in a Jacuzzi with another woman whose face was redacted. And that image was released by the Department of Justice earlier this year as part of the release of the Jeffrey Epstein files. And Clinton said he did not know who that woman was, and he was also asked if he had sex with that woman, and Clinton said no.

And that was not the only photo I'm told that the former president was shown of himself with other women. We're told there were several other images that the president was told to look at, and he said he didn't have sex with any of those women.

And I'm also told that former President Clinton recounted a conversation that he had with President Donald Trump back in the early 2000s at a golf tournament where Jeffrey Epstein came up. And, apparently, Trump told Clinton that there had been a falling out between Trump and Clinton -- that there'd been a falling out between Trump and Epstein, that they were no longer friends apparently because of something that happened with a land deal.

So, these are some of the details, Jake, that we are learning, me and our colleague, M.J. Lee, are learning in real time. Of course, we need the transcript and the deposition to get all of the facts and all of the context around this. House Oversight Chair James Comer says they're working as quickly as possible to get that out.

And now the Clintons want to do this in public. In fact, they didn't really want to do this at all. They argued they were being unfairly targeted for political purposes. They wanted just to submit written statements as part of this investigation. But House Oversight Chair James Comer persisted, said he wanted this done on his terms, under subpoena, and Bill Clinton -- and, ultimately, the Clintons caved under threat of criminal contempt of Congress. That's how we ended up in Chappaqua today.

And there really was bipartisan interest to learn more about Bill Clinton's relationship with Epstein. We'll see if lawmakers are satisfied about what they learned today. They did say that the former president was very cooperative with the committee and answered as many questions as he could, but the question is, where do this investigation go from here? And Democrats say, today's deposition really sets the precedent for them to try and call President Trump in for questioning. And there are a lot of people that Democrats want to talk to, including Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick. Jake?

TAPPER: All right. Annie Grayer and Chappaqua, York, thanks so much for your reporting. I appreciate it.

Let's discuss this all with Democratic Congresswoman Yassamin Ansari of Arizona. She's on the House Oversight Committee and was in today's deposition with former President Bill Clinton. Congresswoman, good to see you. Thanks so much for joining us.

So, can you elaborate on President Clinton's answer about President Trump because there seems to be some disagreement between the ranking Democrat and the Republican chairman about what he actually said?

REP. YASSAMIN ANSARI (D-AZ): Absolutely. Thank you for having me on, Jake. First of all, it's continues to be interesting because the rules of the committee set by the Republicans is that we're not supposed to talk about the details of the questions and answers, but since this has already been publicly litigated and started by Chairman Comer, I think he mischaracterized -- you know, I know he said that President Clinton exonerated Donald Trump. This has been their new word that has been -- it seems like a coordinated effort over the last couple of days. What I learned today that I do think raises more questions is this discrepancy about why Epstein and Donald Trump had a falling out. That is something that was discussed, according to President Clinton. And, again, that'll be in the transcript. The reason for that, that he heard from Donald Trump back in the early 2000s was over a land dispute. And as we know, Donald Trump has given a very different reason over the years and blamed it on Jeffrey Epstein taking away his staff at Mar-a-Lago.

[18:05:00]

So, I think more questions, you know, that's typically what has happened with each of these depositions, we leave with more questions than we had before, and really demonstrates that this investigation is just getting started.

I think Donald Trump needs to come before the committee as soon as possible. He is named in the Epstein files more than almost anybody else. And there's actual, credible allegations of criminal wrongdoing, including the recent, explosive investigative reporting by The New York Times and NPR that found that the DOJ seems to be withholding documentation in regard to FBI investigations of an individual who said that she was abused by Donald Trump when she was a minor.

TAPPER: So, I don't know if you heard the House Republicans on the Oversight Committee their press conference after the deposition was over, but they said that President Trump had long been exonerated. They weren't going to call anybody who has accused him of any wrongdoing Trump or Clinton for that matter, because they're -- I think they called them liars. I believe they did. And they said that that this isn't about Donald Trump and there's nothing there.

Did you hear their response and their comments? And in any case, what would your response be to their declaration that President Trump was exonerated?

ANSARI: I did hear that, and my -- it makes my blood boil.

Let's just look at the facts really quickly. So, if Donald Trump, according to them, is exonerated, then why did Secretary Hillary Clinton, who's literally never met Jeffrey Epstein, come before us? And why did more than ten of the Republicans fly to New York to talk to her? I mean by that standard, Donald Trump should come before this committee.

On top of that, there is no world in which Donald Trump is exonerated of anything. He's named in the files more than almost anybody else. He had a longstanding personal friendship with Jeffrey Epstein. They were very, very close friends. We have everything from the birthday note from the Epstein Estate to now, again, explosive reporting that has come to light, that shows that there was credible allegations from a woman who said she was sexually abused by Donald Trump when she was a minor.

The FBI interviewed this individual multiple times and the DOJ is covering it up. Why? Why did the DOJ hold back those files? Why have they not shared that with the public? Why did Kash Patel lie under oath and say that there was never anything that he had seen that demonstrated that anybody else was part of the allegations? I think it's absurd to say that Donald Trump is exonerated, especially based on the Republican standards of what it takes to come before the committee.

TAPPER: So, Congresswoman, you keep calling the allegations against President Trump in the Epstein files credible. That's a word that you keep using. There are lots of allegations against lots of people. As you know better than I, FBI 302s, which are basically just interviews with people who are making a claim, are not necessarily true. They're not necessarily credible. I'm not saying they are or are not. I'm just saying just because it's written down and put in the Epstein files doesn't mean that it's real. Why do you say it's credible? And is there any investigation going on of anybody that you know of in the Epstein files?

ANSARI: First and foremost, I think that because of the fact that the FBI interviewed this individual multiple times. You don't do that if it's not serious or if you know the FBI was able to determine, you know, typically after one interview, you know, this isn't credible. And the fact that there has been an ongoing cover-up, the Department of Justice has lost all trust, all accountability, and they have now been caught red-handed withholding this specific information from the public view. They still have not released it. They have provided no answers as to where this is.

So, I would say first and foremost, release those files and we can take a look at that and then we will have questions for the FBI about the conclusion of that investigation.

And to your second question, no, and that's a problem. Like the entirety of this exercise is not just so we can have the files released. Just to have them, right? We need to know -- we need to make sure that the DOJ and the FBI are investigating, again, credible allegations so that anybody who may have perpetrated or enabled the crimes is actually held accountable.

[18:10:02]

That's happening in other countries, in the United Kingdom, investigations are starting. Andrew, you know, was arrested. Other people are being held accountable as well. It's a disgrace that that has not started to happen in the United States of America.

TAPPER: We should just note that President Trump denies all wrongdoing or any criminal activity as related to the Epstein files.

Congresswoman Yassamin Ansari, Democrat of Arizona, thank you so much for joining us. We really appreciate it.

ANSARI: Thank you.

TAPPER: I want to bring in CNN Senior Legal Analyst Elie Honig. And, Elie, the last time Bill Clinton test testified under oath, you were probably in like law school or something. It was the Ken Starr case. You actually interviewed a prosecutor who questioned him back then and his lawyer who was sitting him during that testimony. Is there anything that we're hearing about Bill Clinton's performance today that surprises you?

ELIE HONIG, CNN SENIOR LEGAL ANALYST: So, 1998, yes, I was a first year law student. This was, Jake, apparently a vintage Clinton performance. And having spoken with the prosecutor who interrogated Bill Clinton back then, and the defense lawyer, by the way, same defense lawyer who was with Bill Clinton today, I learned that what Bill Clinton did then and now, is he prepares meticulously. He knows all of the evidence. He knows the exact lay of the land. He knows what he has to admit. He knows what he can't deny based on the evidence. And he admits essentially nothing other than that.

And one thing I always remember that the prosecutor from back in 1998 told me, he said, look, I got to be honest with you, for the first 90 percent of that deposition in the grand jury, he was kicking our butts. We didn't get anything out of him. He was calm. He was in control. He didn't make any damaging concessions until he got a little too clever and uttered the infamous line, it depends on what the meaning of is, is. And the prosecutor told me at that moment, I knew that videotape would come out, and I knew that that moment would be what lived on.

So, we'll see. We'll get that videotape, according to Representative Comer, at some point in the next 24 hours or so. I'll believe it when I see it. But we'll see if there's another moment that's sort of indelible like that.

TAPPER: In his opening statement, which was released to the public, President Clinton said he did not know about Epstein's crimes, and that if he had known, he would've turned Epstein in himself. Do you find that credible?

HONIG: Well, there's no evidence to contradict those claims by Bill Clinton that he did nothing wrong and that he knew nothing. Bill Clinton said he did not -- I will say the claim by Bill Clinton that he had, quote, no inkling that Jeffrey Epstein did anything wrong, I do think a rational objective person could have a question about that.

Let's consider the timing. Bill Clinton and Jeffrey Epstein had a relationship. 2002, 2003 was sort of the peak of that relationship. And it wasn't a passing acquaintance. Bill Clinton flew on Epstein's private jet over a dozen times. According to the SDNY's indictment of Jeffrey Epstein, that's exactly the heart of when Jeffrey Epstein was committing his crimes.

We also know that Bill Clinton socialized with Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell. We've seen the photos. Bill Clinton clearly knew there were young women around. And so I think there's a reasonable basis to question whether he ever had an inkling Jeffrey Epstein might've been doing anything wrong.

TAPPER: Democrats on the Oversight Committee say that the Clinton's deposition set a precedent for President Trump and First Lady Melania Trump to testify under oath as well. Is that a legal precedent that they're saying, or is this just political speak?

HONIG: So, it's not a technical legal precedent, but it does give a powerful argument for why Donald Trump should have to come in. The responses we've heard just recently, the last few minutes from the Republicans, I think, are unveiling. One argument is, well, they say Donald Trump never did anything wrong. There's no evidence he did anything wrong. That's not why you get subpoenaed, though. A witness gets subpoenaed. And as Representative Ansari just correctly said, if they're going to bring in Hillary Clinton, how do you then say no to Donald Trump?

The other claim that Representative Comer is making is that Bill Clinton somehow exonerated Donald Trump in his testimony today. Again, we'll have to see that transcript, but people are misusing and overusing this phrase, exonerate. There's no way Bill Clinton would be able to exonerate Donald Trump. At most, he would be able to say, I don't know of Donald Trump doing anything wrong, but that's not universal, global exoneration.

TAPPER: They also said that, the House Republicans, that the survivors, the victims had exonerated Donald Trump. And just to be crystal clear about this, the victims or survivors haven't exonerated anybody. They've made it very clear that they're afraid of naming names because they'll be sued or physically threatened. And so they're waiting for the Justice Department to do that job, not them. And I'm not saying they haven't exonerated Donald Trump specifically. I'm saying they've exonerated zero people, and obviously that includes Donald Trump. Do you agree with that?

HONIG: Yes. Exoneration means you're clearing this person for all purposes and for all time. If any victim says, I never saw Donald Trump. I never saw him do anything bad, okay, that victim doesn't know anything about Donald Trump or name your person.

[18:15:01]

But we are way -- we, all of us, are collectively way overusing this phrase, exoneration. That's not what exoneration means.

TAPPER: Elie Honig, thanks so much.

Coming up next, MAGA firebrand Steve Bannon was a big advocate, at least publicly, for releasing the Epstein files. But what is he saying now about the many, many mentions of his name in the Epstein files and the many, many examples of correspondence between the two long after Epstein's crimes were known? That's next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

STEVE BANNON, HOST, THE WAR ROOM: Epstein is a key that picks the lock on so many things.

We need to get to the bottom of Epstein.

They have to go to the court and demand and unseal the sealed evidence in Epstein.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

TAPPER: So, that's Steve Bannon in 2025. In our Law and Justice Lead, Steve Bannon, the former top aide to President Trump was among the many outspoken MAGA voices calling for the release of the Epstein files last summer.

But now, amid this flood of Epstein-related headlines and questions about people who kept in close touch with him, a CNN review of dozens of hours of Bannon's show on YouTube War Room, found that he has not mentioned the topic in weeks.

[18:20:10]

On January 30th, the Justice Department published millions more pages of Epstein-related documents, including extensive email conversations between Steve Bannon and Jeffrey Epstein, who by then was long known, not only as a sexual criminal, but an ex-con. The connection had previously been known, but so far Bannon has offered little public explanation about how he came to know Epstein, or why he shared so much with him or emailed him so often.

Bannon has not returned CNN's request for comment, but he did tell The New York Times in a statement that his relationship with Epstein was purely professional. Quote, I'm a filmmaker and T.V. host with decades of experience, interviewing controversial figures. That's the only lens through which these private communications should be viewed, a documentary filmmaker working over a period of time to secure 50 hours of interviews from a reclusive subject, unquote.

Now, many a Bannon's discussions with Epstein based on these emails center on new populist vision and politics that Bannon desired to build after leaving the first Trump White House. In 2019, Bannon texted Epstein about ways to take down then Pope Francis, adding the Clintons, Xi Jinping, Pope Francis, E.U., come on brother. Epstein had his own global interest, particularly the future of the then president of the U.N., the Slovakian diplomat, Mirsolav Lajcak. In one 2018 email, Epstein invites Bannon to dinner and says Lajcak's, quote, government will fall this week as planned, smiley face emoji.

Bannon and Epstein seemed to be aware that their partnership was strategic. Epstein once texted Bannon, now you can understand why Trump wakes up in the middle of the night sweating when he hears you and I are friends, interesting comment.

In 2019, his allegations of Epstein's trafficking resurfaced because of Julie K. Brown's series in the Miami Herald. Bannon messaged Epstein with advice. Quote, first, we need to push back on the lies, then crush the pedo trafficking narrative, then rebuild your image as philanthropist, unquote. That's really interesting and definitely does not seem professional.

The two were planning to meet on the morning of July 7th, 2019, the day before Epstein abruptly sent Bannon, all canceled. Federal authorities had intercepted him at a New Jersey airport, arresting Epstein on charges for sex trafficking minors.

Now, since the release of these messages, the backlash against Bannon within the world of MAGA influencers has been building.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BEN SHAPIRO, HOST, THE BEN SHAPIRO SHOW: That doesn't mean that there aren't people who engaged in egregious activity to try to rehab Jeffrey Epstein. That includes people who have not been indicted, from Kathryn Ruemmler to, yes, Steve Bannon, who somehow has gotten off scot free in all of this, which is absolutely beyond me.

BENNY JOHNSON, HOST, THE BENNY JOHNSON SHOW: It's not a good look. Not sure if there's anything criminal there, but it ain't a good look. It's not a good look for a lot of people, but it's not a good look for Steve.

ALEX JONES, HOST, THE ALEX JONES SHOW: I mean, Bannon calls me all the time and sends me links and says, how do we do this? How do you put pressure on that? Hey, we need to get on this. That's Bannon works like 18 hours day. I'm not defending it. I probably wouldn't have hung out with Epstein

(END VIDEO CLIP)

TAPPER: Former Proud Boy Leader Enrique Tarrio has called Bannon's relationship with Epstein, quote, extremely disturbing, unquote.

But there is still no sign yet that Bannon has faced any significant fallout for his ties to Epstein. His show continues to air on the network, Real America's Voice, without interruption, and has featured high profile guests since the release of these texts, including Alabama Senator Tommy Tuberville, current Texas Senate Candidate and Attorney General of Texas Ken Paxton, and White House Trade Adviser Peter Navarro. One Trump Ally tells CNN that Bannon has a lot to answer for and still another administration official says. Bannon's audience is so big, he will likely survive any controversy?

I'm just wondering how any of these people would react if a Democrat or a liberal had been talking as much with Bannon -- I mean with Epstein as Bannon had, interesting.

Coming up, I visited the site here in Philadelphia that President George Washington and John Adams called home. There has been a legal fight over one part of it, the slavery-related displays there. We're going to take a visit to the president's house. That's next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[18:25:00]

TAPPER: In our National Lead today, Democratic Congressman Brendan Boyle of Pennsylvania announced new legislation to permanently restore the slavery-related displays at a key historical landmark here in Philadelphia, where I am today, the president's house. That's what it's called, the former residents of Presidents George Washington and John Adams.

Now, some of the material has been restored, but the legal fight over the Trump administration's efforts to remove these displays about slavery from the president's house, well, that fight continues. I visited the site earlier today.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

TAPPER (on camera): A restoration at the President's house at Independence Mall, where visitors come to celebrate the founding of America, and most of an exhibit marking a dark chapter in our nation's history is once again on display.

This is the site here in Philadelphia where the house of the president of the United States once stood. President's George Washington and John Adams once lived here. And these informational panels here and on this side of the wall tell the stories of the slaves who lived and labored here more than 200 years ago.

[18:30:00]

Most of the panels are back up now that a federal judge has ordered them to be.

Their removal sparked outrage from millions of Americans and from historians who accused the Trump administration of trying to sanitize an important but horrible part of American history.

TIMOTHY WELBECK, DIRECTOR, CENTER OF ANTI-RACISM, TEMPLE UNIVERSITY: It was jarring to see the panels removed.

TAPPER: I visited the exhibit with Timothy Welbeck, director of Temple University's Anti-Racism Center and affiliated faculty in the Department of Africalogy and African-American studies.

WELBECK: It's important to reckon with the first president owned nine people while he held the nation's highest office, and he held them in a place where we're standing. These people were Americans who helped to shape the fabric of who we are as a nation, and their stories are important and including in the broader national narrative.

TAPPER: The Interior Department, which oversees the National Park Service, told CNN in a statement that it disagreed with the court ruling, forcing the panels to be returned, writing, quote, if not for this unnecessary judicial intervention, updated interpretive materials, providing a fuller account of the history of slavery at Independence Hall would have been installed in the coming days.

What do you think about that explanation?

WELBECK: I'm a bit incredulous to that idea, especially because the administration has had antagonism towards telling of stories about slavery and just broader topics about race and racism.

TAPPER: The exhibit tells the story of the nine enslaved people held by George and Martha Washington during his presidency in Philadelphia, documenting how they cooked, cleaned and labored in the household, even as the new nation spoke of freedom and equality.

WELBECK: Hercules Posey, he was the president's chief chef, and so he was responsible primarily for not only making meals for the president, but anytime he was hosting dignitaries and official dinners and things like that. Oney Judge, she served Martha Washington. She was a chambermaid for her. She actually freed herself.

One of my favorite parts of the exhibit is they are footsteps that memorialized her courageous journey to freedom. Leaving the president's house took a remarkable set of bravery considering the prominence of her owner.

TAPPER: What do you make of the argument from President Trump and his administration that there's too much about slavery here, that this should be about what a great man George Washington was and not focus on the fact that he and his family owned slaves?

WELBECK: This is the part of President Washington's legacy, and so we must reckon with that part of his legacy, particularly because we inscribe so much of our nation's values and his personhood. We should also celebrate the unfavorable parts of them too, or at least acknowledge them.

TAPPER: Standing in the shadow of Independence Hall, this exhibit serves as a physical marker of the contradiction inherent in our nation's founding 250 years ago, a country founded on the principles of freedom and liberty, all while slavery endured in the home of our nation's first leader.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

TAPPER (on camera): Last Friday, a federal appeals court said that the Trump administration could stop work on fully restoring the slavery- related exhibit at the president's house while this appeals process plays out. They halted U.S. District Judge Cynthia Rufe's order, which likened the removal to the dystopian world of George Orwell's 1984.

So, it remains to be seen what exactly becomes of this exhibit? We will certainly keep watching.

Trump's Justice Department is now going after five more states in its quest to get personal information about voters. Will those states turn over that data? That story, next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[18:35:00]

TAPPER: We are back with The Lead live in Philadelphia and right now the Law and Justice Lead, because President Trump's Justice Department has been announcing it is filing lawsuits against five more states, Utah, Oklahoma, West Virginia, Kentucky, and New Jersey, across the river, for failing to produce full voter registration lists upon request. U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi calls the lawsuit part of the Justice Department's duty to ensure transparency and secure elections across the country. Here with me to discuss, Democratic Congresswoman Madeleine Dean from right here in Pennsylvania. We're in Haverford, literally right now. Is that your -- is this your district?

REP. MADELEINE DEAN (D-PA): Right adjacent to my district.

TAPPER: Adjacent to your district. Whose district are we actually in?

DEAN: Probably Mary Gay's. We're right on the border.

TAPPER: Okay. Okay. So --

DEAN: Mary Gay Scanlon, forgive me.

TAPPER: Mary Gay Scanlon.

DEAN: Representative Scanlon.

TAPPER: Yes, of course.

So, the Trump administration has now sued more than two dozen states to get this voter data. What's your reaction? Why do you think they want this? They say it's just to make sure that only citizens are voting, I think

DEAN: My reaction is why do they want this? States are in control of elections. They have asked Josh Shapiro and Pennsylvania for our voter rolls.

TAPPER: Shapiro's our governor, just for people out there.

DEAN: Yes.

TAPPER: You're very familiar with the politicians today.

DEAN: Yes. Well, excuse me, forgive me, Governor Shapiro and the secretary of state --

TAPPER: Yes.

DEAN: -- for the voter rolls. That is sensitive information. The Trump administration has no right to it. And the Shapiro government, along with the secretary of state for the state have said no.

TAPPER: And I'm sure you saw The Washington Post report yesterday about President Trump being urged by some of his non-White House advisers that he should consider declaring a declaration of emergency of some sort ahead of the midterms so that he can stop paper ballots, et cetera, et cetera. The White House is pushing back, I should note, and the measures listed in the 2025 draft of the proposed executive order include requiring hand marked and hand counted paper ballots requiring voters to register anew for the 2026 midterms with proof of citizenship, this is from The Washington Post, and restricting mail ballots to limited circumstances. The president says he's not considering this, he hasn't heard about it. DEAN: He's hoping to eliminate all mail-in ballots. And as you know, there's a robust mail-in ballot system here in Pennsylvania that has really liberated people to be able to vote with ease and accuracy and securely.

TAPPER: By the way, a lot of Republicans are vote by ballot, vote by mail. Seniors or a lot of seniors are vote --

DEAN: Let's go back. Mr. Trump himself voted by mail --

[18:40:01]

TAPPER: Yes.

DEAN: -- over and over again. So this is -- and the notion of emergency, that is Mr. Trump's special word, everything's a crisis, everything's an emergency, unless he has anything to do with it. And so we won't fall for it.

And the Shapiro administration, the secretary of state, are doing everything to put things in place to continue to make sure that the state has control of elections and that each county does what it needs to do.

But I need everybody to know that this president will do anything he can to interfere with elections, including this crazy SAVE Act and everything else, that could disenfranchise more than 20 million Americans, by requiring somebody like me to make sure I come in with a passport or a birth certificate that matches my legal name now. It is an attempt to disenfranchise millions of American citizens. It has nothing to do with voter fraud. There is no voter fraud.

TAPPER: I want to touch on something that might happen in the next couple days, we have no idea, a U.S. strike against Iran for not coming to an agreement with the United States on a denuclearization deal. President Trump in the State of the Union address said that Iran is, quote, working to build missiles that will soon reach the United States. Sources tell CNN that's not actually backed up by any U.S. intelligence.

What's your position on potential strikes against Iran?

DEAN: My position is I wish that the president would be honest and clear cut in terms of what his ambition is. He has two carrier strikes there. He has 140 airplanes there. He has 40,000 members of the military in line. This is a very dangerous escalation with absolutely no definition of mission.

I'm a member of Congress. Article 1, Section 8 says that he must come to Congress to talk about any kind of an activity that would be connected with war. And what's even worse is the president hasn't gone to the American people to say what he's interested in. Is it about uranium enrichment? Is it about ballistic missiles, as you just said? Is it about regime change? Is it about democracy? Is it about protecting those protesters? He's given us absolutely no indication.

I've just come back from Israel. I don't know that I told you this.

TAPPER: No.

DEAN: I was in Israel last week, a week and a half ago. And I feel for the citizens of that region for the Israeli citizens who are constantly on a tiptoe as to what might happen as a result of the United States involvement in Iran without any definition or contact with Congress, which would be, to my mind, illegal. And so I have great empathy for people of the region. And the people of Iran deserve better. The protesters who fight for democracy in Iran deserve better.

I hope the president and Mr. Witkoff and Jared Kushner and most importantly the secretary of state, I wish he would step up much more forward than Witkoff and Kushner and have a much more sober conversation both diplomatically and then with Congress and the American people.

TAPPER: All right. Democratic Congresswoman Madeleine Dean of the great Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, nice to be here in Pennsylvania.

DEAN: Thanks for being here.

TAPPER: Of course, coming up tensions in the Middle East after the U.S. Ambassador to Israel tells his staff that if they want to leave the country, they should fly out now. Our experts are here next to give us a reality check on the threat of war in Iran.

Stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[18:47:17]

TAPPER: In the world lead today, the big question as we head into the weekend, is the Trump administration about to start dropping bombs on Iran?

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Well, we haven't made a final decision. We're not exactly happy with the way they negotiated. They can't -- they cannot have nuclear weapons. And we're not thrilled with the way they're negotiating. So we'll see how it all works.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

TAPPER: Trump's comments from earlier today come as the U.S. embassy in Israel announced that the State Department had authorized non- emergency staff and family members of Americans there to leave, quote, "due to safety risks". The embassy added, quote, "persons may wish to consider leaving Israel while commercial flights are available," unquote.

A source tells CNN that U.S. ambassador to Israel Mike Huckabee, additionally told embassy staff if they wanted to leave the country, they should, quote, "do so today." I want to bring in retired Air Force Colonel Cedric Leighton and Wendy Sherman, who served under three presidents including as deputy secretary of state under President Biden. She was the lead U.S. negotiator for the Iran nuclear deal reached during the Obama administration.

Colonel Leighton, CNN's sources and Ambassador Huckabee's warning was out of an abundance of caution, and there was no reason to panic.

What do you think?

CEDRIC LEIGHTON, CNN MILITARY ANALYST: Well, Jake, I think one of the key things is when you look at what's going on in the Middle East right now, we've got a preponderance of force that is highly unusual in the Middle East. So, if you take a look at the map, we can see that you've got a lot of different vessels that are in our area here especially in the Strait of Hormuz. These destroyers and other vessels are there to provide a lot of support for the U.S. forces and the U.S. ability to do that.

But most importantly, we have the carrier, the USS Abraham Lincoln there. And that carrier is going to, of course, provide a lot of air power to the region so, you know looking at this, we have a lot of force there. But out of an abundance of caution, the ambassador in Israel has decided that some non-essential personnel can leave. However, that does mean that they're under imminent threat at this point.

TAPPER: Secretary Sherman, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, we're told, is traveling to Israel on Monday. Does that suggest anything to you about the timing of a possible strike? And what might be his conversations in the days ahead in that region?

WENDY SHERMAN, FORMER DEPUTY SECRETARY OF STATE: Well, one of the most interesting things about this trip, as you probably know, Jake, is he's taking no press. This is totally unprecedented. During every administration, I've worked with five secretaries of state, even on the most sensitive missions, there was press.

[18:50:03]

And so, it makes me wonder, A, if the trip is really going to happen. But secondly, if he's going, is this really to consult on a war plan that Colonel Leighton would know even better than I would.

TAPPER: Colonel Leighton, if the U.S. strikes and Iran retaliates, what might be in their arsenal, Iran?

LEIGHTON: So, one of the things, Jake, that's in their arsenal, there's a series of missiles and that's going to be one of the prime target areas. And you know, when you look at the ranges here, there are about four of these missiles that have a range of 2,000 kilometers, which is a little bit over 1,200 miles. And what does that mean? That means that these missiles are really able to get the entire Middle East, that's in their cone of operations and parts of Eastern Europe. And that, of course, is a significant thing. And that's going to be a

significant target set. That's one of them. And of course, there's the leadership area, the regime. All of those things could potentially be targets for any type of U.S. action at this point.

TAPPER: Secretary Sherman, the Trump administration obviously ordered those strikes last summer, last June against Iran's nuclear weapons facilities. President Trump at the time said that they had been obliterated.

Realistically speaking, as you know about, the Iran nuclear program, is it possible that they were obliterated? And yet Iran would today be so close to a nuclear weapons program, that or weapon that the U.S. would need to strike? Or is it more likely that they were not obliterated last summer?

SHERMAN: Well, I don't think they were obliterated. I think that the Iranians do want to try to reconstitute those capabilities they have the knowledge. But I think what's important here, Jake, is that we are having so many different signals coming from the administration. Steve Witkoff, the special envoy, said they were within a week of being able to do bad things. Then Secretary Rubio said they're not enriching right now, but they would like to. The administration has said they have -- they're almost close to getting an intercontinental ballistic missile that could reach the United States.

And we know as you pointed out that is not the case. It's not that they wouldn't like to have them, but it's not happening tomorrow. So, the president has not made the case for why military action is necessary, why there is an imminent threat to the United States. He has not made the case. Congress has not endorsed that action and none of us really know what the reason is that he's doing this.

It's certainly not to protect the protesters. That issue hasn't come up for some time now, when in fact that was the original reason for getting into this at all. And a good one.

TAPPER: Wendy Sherman and Cedric Leighton, thank you so much. We'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[18:57:05]

TAPPER: In our national lead, new data shows a mechanic shortage is looming over the air travel industry.

Here's CNN's Pete Muntean.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

PETE MUNTEAN, CNN AVIATION CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Taylor Hill is learning to fix jet engines, part of an aviation industry push to solve a worker shortage that could ground flights.

TAYLOR HILL, STUDENT: To me, it's job security. MUNTEAN (voice-over): Hill is one of 185 students in Cincinnati

state's aviation maintenance technology program that's booming as airlines scramble for mechanics.

KEN ROHLING, CINCINNATTI STATE: So we have our gear up indication.

MUNTEAN (voice-over): Ken Rohling is a 40-year industry veteran who now teaches here.

ROHLING: When we first got out in '87, jobs were few and far between. But nowadays, students are getting out, getting full time jobs right away, right out of school.

MUNTEAN: That's good.

ROHLING: It's very good.

MUNTEAN (voice-over): Just released data shows 41 percent of certified mechanics in the United States are over 60, with 45,000 expected to retire in the next decade. Airlines are now flying older planes longer, meaning more maintenance with fewer people to do the work.

BRIAN PRENTICE, PARTNER, OLIVER WYMAN: Delays or cancellations may become more common, and then aircraft out of service for maintenance will be more common, which will then again just lead to fewer flights and fewer options for the traveling public.

MUNTEAN: So I put this in here.

MUNTEAN (voice-over): Maybe a sign of just how badly mechanics are needed. They let me try it at the GE aerospace training center where mechanics get advanced training on specific engines.

MUNTEAN: Oh. No turbine maintenance for me. I'm already dropping stuff.

MUNTEAN (voice-over): I even inspected the critical inner turbine for flaws using a borescope

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: There you go. Keep feeding the probe.

MUNTEAN: This is the jet engine that I was just allowed to work on. It's common on regional jets that the airlines use for smaller routes. You've probably seen it before. And these are the fan blades that you've probably seen in the very front of the engine.

There are 28 of these that we just took off of this engine, and they're balanced with the blade on the opposite side down to the ounce. You can see why aircraft mechanics come through here for extra training. About 4,000 of them pass through this facility each year.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: So this is the rite of passage for all jet students to come in and take this class.

MUNTEAN (voice-over): Instructor Jim Condon (ph) was so confident in my work that he let me autograph the engine. MUNTEAN: You think I did okay today?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You did great.

MUNTEAN (voice-over): The industry is still decades away from solving its shortage.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Kind of keep it as level as you can.

MUNTEAN (voice-over): But here in Cincinnati, mechanics in training are hopeful that they are on the leading edge of change.

HILL: We're always going to need mechanics. I think it's a good career.

MUNTEAN (voice-over): Pete Muntean, CNN, Cincinnati, Ohio

(END VIDEOTAPE)

TAPPER: Before we go, I want to tell you why I'm in Philly. Today, I got a chance to visit my old grade school and meet with some aspiring sixth, seventh eighth grade journalists there and also various kids ages three to 14, such a treat.

I want to thank the Philadelphia school for having me out this morning. And also I got a chance to reunite with friends, most of whom I haven't seen since I was 11 or 12 years.

As Steve King wrote at the end of the incredible book and movie "Stand By Me", quote, "I never had any friends later on like the ones I had when I was 12." Does anyone?

"ERIN BURNETT OUTFRONT" starts now. Have a great weekend.